That's what I've read also. Additional software updates in the future from Oppo will address MQA support via the USB DAC input on the 205.
MQA Discussion
- Thread starter still-one
- Start date
That's what I've read also. Additional software updates in the future from Oppo will address MQA support via the USB DAC input on the 205.
CPP
Active member
Remember this is just a beta on the 205 from OPPO, and I just read this this morning over on AVS from Bob Pariseau that is in the know with OPPO.
So the beta for the OPPO 205 for MQA so far only provides;
"" MQA support is currently only for Media Files. I.e., the stuff you play via the Music icon on Home Menu.
However, OPPO has now stated they are working on:
1) Support for MQA-CD
2) Support for MQA playback into the Asynchronous DAC Input, and
3) Support for MQA playback into the Optical / Coax Inputs
No time frame has yet been announced. """"
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/149-b...05-uhd-blu-ray-player-owner-s-thread-101.html
Just glad I didn't load the beta.
So the beta for the OPPO 205 for MQA so far only provides;
"" MQA support is currently only for Media Files. I.e., the stuff you play via the Music icon on Home Menu.
However, OPPO has now stated they are working on:
1) Support for MQA-CD
2) Support for MQA playback into the Asynchronous DAC Input, and
3) Support for MQA playback into the Optical / Coax Inputs
No time frame has yet been announced. """"
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/149-b...05-uhd-blu-ray-player-owner-s-thread-101.html
Just glad I didn't load the beta.
Just a follow-up to yesterday's post. So, from the 2L website, I picked the following song to test out on the updated firmware of the Oppo:
Mozart: Violin concerto in D major - Allegro
Marianne Thorsen / TrondheimSolistene
There were versions that pre-dated MQA encoding and also had the MQA encoding. I listened to both versions at various encoding schemes (PCM and DSD64).
I feel I can hear a difference between the non-MQA-encoded version and the MQA-encoded version. It is definitely subtle and the best way I can describe it is as cleaner transients. Not so much from soft to loud, but more like initial attack of the notes being played. Being that this was a violin concerto, it was most evident on the violinist, but other instruments in the orchestra benefited from this, too. The first analogy that popped into my head was comparing it to the edge of a knife. Over repeated use, the cutting edge of a knife rolls over, reducing its cutting efficiency. By using a steel, you re-true the cutting edge. Sounds seemed to slice through the air more cleanly with MQA.
That being said, if MQA is destined for the streaming masses, I don't know that mass-fi equipment (at least current mass-fi equipment) would be resolving enough to be able to tell the difference.
Mozart: Violin concerto in D major - Allegro
Marianne Thorsen / TrondheimSolistene
There were versions that pre-dated MQA encoding and also had the MQA encoding. I listened to both versions at various encoding schemes (PCM and DSD64).
I feel I can hear a difference between the non-MQA-encoded version and the MQA-encoded version. It is definitely subtle and the best way I can describe it is as cleaner transients. Not so much from soft to loud, but more like initial attack of the notes being played. Being that this was a violin concerto, it was most evident on the violinist, but other instruments in the orchestra benefited from this, too. The first analogy that popped into my head was comparing it to the edge of a knife. Over repeated use, the cutting edge of a knife rolls over, reducing its cutting efficiency. By using a steel, you re-true the cutting edge. Sounds seemed to slice through the air more cleanly with MQA.
That being said, if MQA is destined for the streaming masses, I don't know that mass-fi equipment (at least current mass-fi equipment) would be resolving enough to be able to tell the difference.
Interesting, I'm following the same thread over on AVS Forums. From what I gathered, the beta could only be loaded via the USB port. The firmware update I just loaded was done over the Internet. Plus, there was a press release on the TAS website about this latest firmware update and it didn't mention "beta" at all. Of course, I'm certainly willing to concede I might be wrong.
CPP
Active member
Incorrect, its can be loaded via USB or if requested a CD with the beta firmware from OPPO. https://www.oppodigital.com/blu-ray-udp-203/UDP203-firmware-54-1108B.aspx
The final release MQA firmware for the 205 is officially released. This isn’t a beta as of 11/27
[FONT="]Latest Official Release Version[/FONT]
[FONT="]Release date: November 27, 2017.
Category: Latest Official Release[/FONT]
[FONT="]
Main Version: UDP20X-54-1127
Loader Version: TF0035
MCU Version: MCU205-01-1220[/FONT]
[FONT="]Latest Official Release Version[/FONT]
[FONT="]Release date: November 27, 2017.
Category: Latest Official Release[/FONT]
[FONT="]
Main Version: UDP20X-54-1127
Loader Version: TF0035
MCU Version: MCU205-01-1220[/FONT]
This is what I downloaded from the Internet directly to my Oppo and installed on Tuesday night. When the discussion of the beta version being available started floating around the AVS forums, the firmware wasn't available via this specific method (I tried).
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Just reading Robert Harley’s MQA article in the TAS 2018 Headphone Special. According to Harley, in order to get a 192K stream the MQA file has to be unfolded and decoded. But in turn, if a MQA file is played back by a MQA DAC the stream can be anything between 88k - 384k depending on source file.
What I did not know is that the Berkeley Ref 2 is just a renderer, i.e. it requires to be fed with an unfolded MQA file in oder to do full MQA.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What I did not know is that the Berkeley Ref 2 is just a renderer, i.e. it requires to be fed with an unfolded MQA file in oder to do full MQA.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Correct. I'm using the Lumin U1 which decodes into the Berk REF2 MQA which renders.
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Ok, I see. I think any of the Aurenders would be another option.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Aurender doesn't decode MQA....yet.
That’s right. What I meant was that an Aurender could be used to do the unfolding for the Berkeley [emoji3].
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
CPP
Active member
Well that's awesome, I will download tonight.
Can't remember if this video was posted....
https://youtu.be/drv9ESli5yI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://youtu.be/drv9ESli5yI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
M
mauidan
Guest
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Now I am finally able to do a proper MQA test: Listening with the outstanding Brinkmann Nyquist, with Tidal Hi-Fi streaming in MQA and PCM. I listened via the Nyquist’s headphone output, could maybe have taken it a notch further by getting the Auralic Gemini 2000 headphone amp into play, but then the two DACs might have watered down the comparison results.
First part of the effort was with a pair of Audeze EL-8 Titaniums, which I picked up for office telcos in a Black Friday sale. Difference between MQA and PCM... what difference? There might have been one, but if there was it was minuscule and pretty much too close to call.
Out came my trusty and ruthless detail revelators, which lay out every inkling of detail in the music: Sennheiser HD800s with a Cardas cable.
1) Diana Krall/ Wallflower album, playing “Desperado”. The difference is not huge, but clearly audible. While I did not find too much difference in details, bass/ treble, dynamics etc. the MQA version was a little more laid back. It was not that the MQA version was subdued, but in comparison the PCM treble had some ringing to it, a kind of a digital glare, which was absent from the MQA version. This difference was most evident in the piano sound.
MQA, dix points. A more relaxing listening experience.
2) Bertrand Chamayou/ Debussy, playing Cello Sonata in D Minor, L.135: III, Finale. While both sounded good, with MQA the cello sounds more natural, both versions having detail, depth and MQA adding a naturalness I usually only hear live. Hearing minutiae detail of the bow scraping the strings, but no edginess in it. Very good.
This time I liked MQA quite a bit more. MQA was the clear winner.
3) Project Mama Earth with Joss Stone, listening to “Mama Earth”. Joss Stone’s singing appears to reveal more detail or have less sibilants with MQA. Best part and most significant difference comes at ‘1:00 in the first bass drum fill-in: it sounds drier, more real and more life-like. Like a live drum. Really great. In comparison the same drum in PCM sounds rounder and not as natural.
Thumbs up for MQA.
4) Beck/ Sea Change, playing “Golden Age” and “Paper Tiger”. In the intro of Golden Age the guitar treble in the PCM version has a ringing to it, which is a tad sharp. In comparison the MQA version is is slightly smoother, while not losing out in sparkle. In paper Tiger drum entry I did not hear a similarly striking difference as in “Mama Earth”, but I felt Beck’s voice was a bit more immediate in MQA. In the strings the more differentiated string vibration was there, similar to the Debussy piece.
Oui, oui, MQA.
5) Anouar Brahem/ Blue Maquams, playing “Opening Day”. I felt Brahem’s Oud sounded more differentiated in MQA and when Jack De Johnette enters with the cymbals, I felt the differentiation between the impact of the stick hitting and the cymbal resonation was more clear. I don’t think there was anything missing in PCM, it was more like the stick impact and cymbal details were obstructed by this digital ringing I also heard in other pieces earlier.
Also an audible difference.
So, what’s the verdict? A couple of observations:
- how the test was conducted was that I randomly picked material I know and regarding which I was aware that there are PCM and MQA versions available in Tidal. Then I just played five songs and did each time a comparison trying to hear differences. Focusing on certain passages in both versions
- the difference in sound and details between MQA and PCM were rather small, hearing more details on some tracks could simply be a result of the MQA file being of higher resolution
- while I could hear differences with the Senns + a modded cable in five songs played in a row, this was not so much the case with the Audezes. I also doubt the difference would have been so obvious when playing back via loudspeakers with room resonances etc. kicking in
- part of hearing a difference can surely be attributed to the outstanding Brinkmann Nyquist and its capabilities and a superb headphone section
Would I buy a MQA DAC due to the differences?
- I could very well imagine buying the Nyquist, it is simply outstanding and has a sound to die for - also love the tube front end and the immaculate build quality
- would I buy a MQA DAC for the details I need a headphone session for in order to hear them, with probably one of the most revealing open back headphones ever built? Not so sure
- BUT while the MQA benefits I heard definitely were very nice, having been listening for a couple of days now, the biggest benefit I would attribute to MQA is it being non-fatiguing - like analogue
- I mostly listen to analogue because it is more relaxing, maybe I do an analogue/ MQA or DSD/ MQA comparison one day
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
First part of the effort was with a pair of Audeze EL-8 Titaniums, which I picked up for office telcos in a Black Friday sale. Difference between MQA and PCM... what difference? There might have been one, but if there was it was minuscule and pretty much too close to call.
Out came my trusty and ruthless detail revelators, which lay out every inkling of detail in the music: Sennheiser HD800s with a Cardas cable.
1) Diana Krall/ Wallflower album, playing “Desperado”. The difference is not huge, but clearly audible. While I did not find too much difference in details, bass/ treble, dynamics etc. the MQA version was a little more laid back. It was not that the MQA version was subdued, but in comparison the PCM treble had some ringing to it, a kind of a digital glare, which was absent from the MQA version. This difference was most evident in the piano sound.
MQA, dix points. A more relaxing listening experience.
2) Bertrand Chamayou/ Debussy, playing Cello Sonata in D Minor, L.135: III, Finale. While both sounded good, with MQA the cello sounds more natural, both versions having detail, depth and MQA adding a naturalness I usually only hear live. Hearing minutiae detail of the bow scraping the strings, but no edginess in it. Very good.
This time I liked MQA quite a bit more. MQA was the clear winner.
3) Project Mama Earth with Joss Stone, listening to “Mama Earth”. Joss Stone’s singing appears to reveal more detail or have less sibilants with MQA. Best part and most significant difference comes at ‘1:00 in the first bass drum fill-in: it sounds drier, more real and more life-like. Like a live drum. Really great. In comparison the same drum in PCM sounds rounder and not as natural.
Thumbs up for MQA.
4) Beck/ Sea Change, playing “Golden Age” and “Paper Tiger”. In the intro of Golden Age the guitar treble in the PCM version has a ringing to it, which is a tad sharp. In comparison the MQA version is is slightly smoother, while not losing out in sparkle. In paper Tiger drum entry I did not hear a similarly striking difference as in “Mama Earth”, but I felt Beck’s voice was a bit more immediate in MQA. In the strings the more differentiated string vibration was there, similar to the Debussy piece.
Oui, oui, MQA.
5) Anouar Brahem/ Blue Maquams, playing “Opening Day”. I felt Brahem’s Oud sounded more differentiated in MQA and when Jack De Johnette enters with the cymbals, I felt the differentiation between the impact of the stick hitting and the cymbal resonation was more clear. I don’t think there was anything missing in PCM, it was more like the stick impact and cymbal details were obstructed by this digital ringing I also heard in other pieces earlier.
Also an audible difference.
So, what’s the verdict? A couple of observations:
- how the test was conducted was that I randomly picked material I know and regarding which I was aware that there are PCM and MQA versions available in Tidal. Then I just played five songs and did each time a comparison trying to hear differences. Focusing on certain passages in both versions
- the difference in sound and details between MQA and PCM were rather small, hearing more details on some tracks could simply be a result of the MQA file being of higher resolution
- while I could hear differences with the Senns + a modded cable in five songs played in a row, this was not so much the case with the Audezes. I also doubt the difference would have been so obvious when playing back via loudspeakers with room resonances etc. kicking in
- part of hearing a difference can surely be attributed to the outstanding Brinkmann Nyquist and its capabilities and a superb headphone section
Would I buy a MQA DAC due to the differences?
- I could very well imagine buying the Nyquist, it is simply outstanding and has a sound to die for - also love the tube front end and the immaculate build quality
- would I buy a MQA DAC for the details I need a headphone session for in order to hear them, with probably one of the most revealing open back headphones ever built? Not so sure
- BUT while the MQA benefits I heard definitely were very nice, having been listening for a couple of days now, the biggest benefit I would attribute to MQA is it being non-fatiguing - like analogue
- I mostly listen to analogue because it is more relaxing, maybe I do an analogue/ MQA or DSD/ MQA comparison one day
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
radioactive
New member
Need I say more? Guess who finally released their MQA FPGA Firmware? I guess Christmas came early to Bryan's house this year :audiophile: 
- Rossini Time
- Rossini Time
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Adding to the list of MQA comparisons, now listening via the main system: Contrary to what I assumed yesterday, quite an easy differentiation between MQA and non-MQA tracks through the Magicos.
Random tracks based on an article I read earlier today, very audiophile selection:
- Kiss/ Dynasty, I Was Born For Lovin’ You, MQA version sounds a bit muddled and Ace Frehley’s guitar is a tad too polite - the Gibson Humbuckers, do have some more bite
- Kiss/ Creatures Of The Night, namesake track: again MQA is too polite and the music loses a bit of its dynamics
Changing styles:
- Steely Dan/ Gaucho, Hey Nineteen: MQA much better than the Kiss recordings, details and clarity preserved in the MQA version, but leaving out the digital glare
- Al Jarreau/ My Old Friend: Celebrating George Duke, My Old Friend, little difference overall, MQA with a bit better bass definition (higher resolution)
- Madeline Peyroux/ Secular Hymns, Goy You On My Mind, only slight difference through less glare in MQA, could be due to 44.1K vs. 96K, guitar solo more liquid in PCM
Now assuming rock might sound a tad too polite in MQA, trying some:
- Black Sabbath/ Ultimate Collection, Paranoid (2009 remaster, original not available): No remarkable difference, if anything surprisingly MQA more aggressive - difference most likely due to MQA being more hi-res
- ZZ Top/ Tres Hombres, Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers, Eliminator/ Gimme All you Loving both a tad polite in MQA, missing some of the pizzaz and aggressive Humbucker growl (sounding a bit like playing with a transistor guitar amp, which those guys hardly would do)
- Van Halen/ namesake album, Runnin’ With The Devil & Eruption, MQA sounding better (less glare) and Eddie’s signature brown sound not suffering from politeness, pretty much the opposite being very nice in 192K - volume just needs to be adjusted as non-MQA is louder
- would be interesting to compare Ozzy’s “Crazy Train”, Mötley’s “Shout At The Devil” or AC DC’s “Shake Your Foundations”, which all feature signature guitar riffs and soli - unfortunately no MQA versions yet (is there a reason for that?)
Another summary on MQA benefits: most value with “audiophile” recordings
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Random tracks based on an article I read earlier today, very audiophile selection:
- Kiss/ Dynasty, I Was Born For Lovin’ You, MQA version sounds a bit muddled and Ace Frehley’s guitar is a tad too polite - the Gibson Humbuckers, do have some more bite
- Kiss/ Creatures Of The Night, namesake track: again MQA is too polite and the music loses a bit of its dynamics
Changing styles:
- Steely Dan/ Gaucho, Hey Nineteen: MQA much better than the Kiss recordings, details and clarity preserved in the MQA version, but leaving out the digital glare
- Al Jarreau/ My Old Friend: Celebrating George Duke, My Old Friend, little difference overall, MQA with a bit better bass definition (higher resolution)
- Madeline Peyroux/ Secular Hymns, Goy You On My Mind, only slight difference through less glare in MQA, could be due to 44.1K vs. 96K, guitar solo more liquid in PCM
Now assuming rock might sound a tad too polite in MQA, trying some:
- Black Sabbath/ Ultimate Collection, Paranoid (2009 remaster, original not available): No remarkable difference, if anything surprisingly MQA more aggressive - difference most likely due to MQA being more hi-res
- ZZ Top/ Tres Hombres, Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers, Eliminator/ Gimme All you Loving both a tad polite in MQA, missing some of the pizzaz and aggressive Humbucker growl (sounding a bit like playing with a transistor guitar amp, which those guys hardly would do)
- Van Halen/ namesake album, Runnin’ With The Devil & Eruption, MQA sounding better (less glare) and Eddie’s signature brown sound not suffering from politeness, pretty much the opposite being very nice in 192K - volume just needs to be adjusted as non-MQA is louder
- would be interesting to compare Ozzy’s “Crazy Train”, Mötley’s “Shout At The Devil” or AC DC’s “Shake Your Foundations”, which all feature signature guitar riffs and soli - unfortunately no MQA versions yet (is there a reason for that?)
Another summary on MQA benefits: most value with “audiophile” recordings
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk